The recent floods in Bihar and Assam have devastated the lives of a number of our fellow countrymen. I was regularly following all the relevant news and developments, and was feeling disturbed. However, very honestly speaking, the thought of doing something to help them did not strike to my mind.
It was only today that I came across a suggestion made by fellow blogger Mr. Sanjay Jha - from Delhi Bloggers Bloc – that something should be done for our hapless countrymen. Despite being short, Sanjay’s message was so powerful that it immediately touched my heart.
I humbly request to everybody who comes across this blog posting to do something for those star-crossed friends of ours. Little contributions from each of us may collectively turn into something substantial for them.
At the end, lots of thanks to Sanjay for inspiring me to at least think of doing something, instead of just tracking news through media and discuss the same with friends.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
Wikipedia - World's Knowledge At Your Finger Tip
It was in 2006 that I first came to know about Wikipedia.org, and the very first interaction made me fall in love with it, head over heels.
Just try to think of a single web site like Wikipedia.org, and you will fail. Because there is none. After all, where will you get a single point source of information on everything under the Sun, ranging from the topics like Adolf Hitler and Global Warming to the ones like "Dhaba" and "Chutney"? Just ask for the information on anything, and Wikipedia.org is there at your service. It is very very very rare that you will fail to locate the information that you are seeking. Yes, sometimes it happens. It has happenned for a couple of times with my humble self, as well. But as I said, it is very very very rare.
Some of my friends compare the web site with Encyclopedia. Well, while I accept that Encyclopedia does come very close to Wikipedia, I do not consider the former to be exactly at par with the latter. Why? Well, mainly for 3 reasons.
No. 1, the range of Encyclopedia is not as widespread as that of Wikipedia.org. As I have already said that Wikipedia.org contains information on everything ranging from the topics like Adolf Hitler and Global Warming to the ones like "Dhaba" and "Chutney". This is something you cannot expect from Encyclopedia. For example, right now I typed "Michelle" in the "search box" of Wikipedia.org. And it is showing the names of various people named Michelle, quite a number of whom will certainly not feature in Encyclopedia.
No. 2, the regular updating of Wikipedia.org. The information found in a particular series of Encyclopedia are restricted to the information considered valuable at the time of publication of that series. But that is not the case with Wikipedia.org It is regularly updated. In fact, you can even find the Website containing a detailed information about a person who has become famous just 1 hour back. A notable example of that sort is that of Abhinav Bindra. Within days of his winning the Olympics gold medal I searched for his name in the Wikipedia, and found the same to be present there.
No. 3, Wikipedia gives you the liberty to add/modify content. In case you feel the web site should have displayed information about a particular person/topic/country, etc, you can create content on the same and submit to the site.
You can also add content (and thus add value) to an already existing content, provided you have something valuable to add.
And yes, you also have the opportunity to rectify a particular bit of information if you find it to be wrong.
Needless to say, like the benefits mentioned in points no. 1 and 2, the opportunities mentioned in point no. 3 are not to be found in Encyclopedia.
Yes, Wikipedia.org does have its own shares of draw backs. For example, the information found in it are sometimes not accurate. And it is widely suggsted not to have blind faith on Wikipedia.org. Nevertheless, the web site is a golden feather in the cap of Internet in general and Web 2.0 in particular.
Just try to think of a single web site like Wikipedia.org, and you will fail. Because there is none. After all, where will you get a single point source of information on everything under the Sun, ranging from the topics like Adolf Hitler and Global Warming to the ones like "Dhaba" and "Chutney"? Just ask for the information on anything, and Wikipedia.org is there at your service. It is very very very rare that you will fail to locate the information that you are seeking. Yes, sometimes it happens. It has happenned for a couple of times with my humble self, as well. But as I said, it is very very very rare.
Some of my friends compare the web site with Encyclopedia. Well, while I accept that Encyclopedia does come very close to Wikipedia, I do not consider the former to be exactly at par with the latter. Why? Well, mainly for 3 reasons.
No. 1, the range of Encyclopedia is not as widespread as that of Wikipedia.org. As I have already said that Wikipedia.org contains information on everything ranging from the topics like Adolf Hitler and Global Warming to the ones like "Dhaba" and "Chutney". This is something you cannot expect from Encyclopedia. For example, right now I typed "Michelle" in the "search box" of Wikipedia.org. And it is showing the names of various people named Michelle, quite a number of whom will certainly not feature in Encyclopedia.
No. 2, the regular updating of Wikipedia.org. The information found in a particular series of Encyclopedia are restricted to the information considered valuable at the time of publication of that series. But that is not the case with Wikipedia.org It is regularly updated. In fact, you can even find the Website containing a detailed information about a person who has become famous just 1 hour back. A notable example of that sort is that of Abhinav Bindra. Within days of his winning the Olympics gold medal I searched for his name in the Wikipedia, and found the same to be present there.
No. 3, Wikipedia gives you the liberty to add/modify content. In case you feel the web site should have displayed information about a particular person/topic/country, etc, you can create content on the same and submit to the site.
You can also add content (and thus add value) to an already existing content, provided you have something valuable to add.
And yes, you also have the opportunity to rectify a particular bit of information if you find it to be wrong.
Needless to say, like the benefits mentioned in points no. 1 and 2, the opportunities mentioned in point no. 3 are not to be found in Encyclopedia.
Yes, Wikipedia.org does have its own shares of draw backs. For example, the information found in it are sometimes not accurate. And it is widely suggsted not to have blind faith on Wikipedia.org. Nevertheless, the web site is a golden feather in the cap of Internet in general and Web 2.0 in particular.
Ruling Coalition in Pakistan Suffers Crack
Just the other day – in my last posting – I had written that now Musharraf was out, it was the time for real test for the sustainability of the ruling coalition in Pakistan. Some political watchers had already started saying that the common objective of ousting Musharraf was the only binding force between the two major constituents of the ruling coalition, and now it was time for the coalition leaders to prove those political watchers wrong.
My posting had barely gathered dust when the world witnessed what it had already anticipated – a crumbling of the coalition with Nawaz Sharif’s party pulling out of the same. Reason? Differences of opinion with Zardari & Co. over key issues, such as the reinstatement of the judges sacked by Musharraf and selecting the candidate for the Presidential election to be held on 6th September (Nawaz’s party wants an apolitical candidate for the position, while Zardari reportedly wants to contest for the position himself).
Differences of opinion in a coalition of government are nothing unusual. But the coalition partners must have the maturity and political acumen to sort them out amicably, without letting the same threaten the sustainability of the coalition itself. What happened in Pakistan does not only reflect the political undependability of the parties of Nawaz Sharif and Zardari, but it raises serious question about the dependability of the so called political parties of Pakistan as a whole. After all, how can the common people of Pakistan now afford to bank on parties which fail to sort out issues and part ways at the drop of a hat, eventually leading the country to political instability? Have the coalition leaders given a thought to the message that their action has sent to the mass?
The image of these so called democratic leaders was in any case not very bright in Pakistan. They actually managed to grab power in the last election by piggybacking on the shabby image of Musharraf. The mass actually voted out the dictator, and not voted in these leaders. So what these leaders should have immediately done after coming to power was to focus on good governance, thus brightening their image and enhancing their administrative credibility. And what they did was just the opposite.
And what is worse is that this development will pave the way for the revival of the army (as I had said in my last posting). And if the army does manage to exploit the present turmoil and grab power, then they will have an extra advantage this time. And what is that?
Well, they can claim that the democratic political parties are absolutely not dependable, as they cannot sustain their internal problems, let alone broader issues faced by the nation. And thus depending on them means ushering in turmoil, disturbances and political instability. On the other hand the army is an organized and disciplined institution, determined to achieve something for the nation.
Needless to say that the common Pakistanis will instantly buy such propaganda by the army, with the bitter experience of depending on democratic political parties fresh in their mind. And then it will be extremely difficult for the democratic leaders to oust the army, no matter who the dictator is. In fact, they will not even have the guts to approach the common people for support, as the latter will always ask those leaders to explain the reason for their failure to retain the power that they had been given the last time.
My posting had barely gathered dust when the world witnessed what it had already anticipated – a crumbling of the coalition with Nawaz Sharif’s party pulling out of the same. Reason? Differences of opinion with Zardari & Co. over key issues, such as the reinstatement of the judges sacked by Musharraf and selecting the candidate for the Presidential election to be held on 6th September (Nawaz’s party wants an apolitical candidate for the position, while Zardari reportedly wants to contest for the position himself).
Differences of opinion in a coalition of government are nothing unusual. But the coalition partners must have the maturity and political acumen to sort them out amicably, without letting the same threaten the sustainability of the coalition itself. What happened in Pakistan does not only reflect the political undependability of the parties of Nawaz Sharif and Zardari, but it raises serious question about the dependability of the so called political parties of Pakistan as a whole. After all, how can the common people of Pakistan now afford to bank on parties which fail to sort out issues and part ways at the drop of a hat, eventually leading the country to political instability? Have the coalition leaders given a thought to the message that their action has sent to the mass?
The image of these so called democratic leaders was in any case not very bright in Pakistan. They actually managed to grab power in the last election by piggybacking on the shabby image of Musharraf. The mass actually voted out the dictator, and not voted in these leaders. So what these leaders should have immediately done after coming to power was to focus on good governance, thus brightening their image and enhancing their administrative credibility. And what they did was just the opposite.
And what is worse is that this development will pave the way for the revival of the army (as I had said in my last posting). And if the army does manage to exploit the present turmoil and grab power, then they will have an extra advantage this time. And what is that?
Well, they can claim that the democratic political parties are absolutely not dependable, as they cannot sustain their internal problems, let alone broader issues faced by the nation. And thus depending on them means ushering in turmoil, disturbances and political instability. On the other hand the army is an organized and disciplined institution, determined to achieve something for the nation.
Needless to say that the common Pakistanis will instantly buy such propaganda by the army, with the bitter experience of depending on democratic political parties fresh in their mind. And then it will be extremely difficult for the democratic leaders to oust the army, no matter who the dictator is. In fact, they will not even have the guts to approach the common people for support, as the latter will always ask those leaders to explain the reason for their failure to retain the power that they had been given the last time.
Friday, August 22, 2008
End For The Musharraf Regime
He had tried his best to avoid it, and had successfully delayed it for quite some time. But at last Musharraf had to accept the inevitable – his ouster. With the threat of a disgraceful impeachment looming over his head, the embattled President announced his resignation in a press conference on 18th August, 2008.
In a carefully constructed speech with an emotional undertone, the former dictator gave a detailed description of all the achievements made by his government, ranging from the ones made in trade and commerce (like attracting foreign investments) to those in education, social development, etc. Like shrewd politician he also admitted that he may have made certain mistakes, and justified the same on the basis of “Man is to err” philosophy.
Significantly, he claimed that he was not afraid of facing the impeachment motion, as all the charges against him were “wrong”. Rather, he claimed to be confident of winning the impeachment motion. But still he decided to put down his papers, as he felt that any such action against the President of the country would make Pakistan lose its face in the international arena. This, as per Musharraf’s version, was the only reason why he decided to quit.
No matter how strong the opposition against him was, Musharraf’s ouster would not have been easy if he managed to win USA’s support. In fact, USA was his last refuge, and Musharraf had heavily banked on the country which had considered Musharraf’s Pakistan a significant ally in the war against terrorism. However, Bush and his companions decided to keep themselves away from the internal politics of Pakistan, leaving Musharraf helpless against the huge tide of opposition against him.
Well, now comes the crucial question. Now Musharraf is out, what will happen to the ruling coalition? There have been some sporadic comments that anti-Musharraf movement was the only unifying factor for the coalition partners having lots of differences over various issues. In fact, they had joined hands only to address the common political objective, i.e. the ouster of Musharraf. With that common political objective achieved, will they be now able to retain their friendship?
Their differences of opinion have already been out on various occasions, which raise serious questions about the sustainability of the coalition. One key issue, that is threatening the coalition’s sustainability, is the issue of reinstating the judges suspended by Musharraf. In fact, the difference of opinion on this issue has gone to such an extent that just the other day Nawaz Sharif threatened to pull out of the coalition.
The leaders of the coalition partner must sort out all these issues as soon as possible, and ensure a stable government aimed at offering a clean and effective administration. The failure of the democratically elected government to sustain its internal problems will not only pave the way for the army’s revival (with either Musharraf or Kiyani or somebody else at the helm), but will also seriously damage Pakistan’s common peoples’ faith and confidence on the country’s democratic political parties. After all, how can a coalition claim to solve the country’s problems when it cannot solve its internal problems?
In a carefully constructed speech with an emotional undertone, the former dictator gave a detailed description of all the achievements made by his government, ranging from the ones made in trade and commerce (like attracting foreign investments) to those in education, social development, etc. Like shrewd politician he also admitted that he may have made certain mistakes, and justified the same on the basis of “Man is to err” philosophy.
Significantly, he claimed that he was not afraid of facing the impeachment motion, as all the charges against him were “wrong”. Rather, he claimed to be confident of winning the impeachment motion. But still he decided to put down his papers, as he felt that any such action against the President of the country would make Pakistan lose its face in the international arena. This, as per Musharraf’s version, was the only reason why he decided to quit.
No matter how strong the opposition against him was, Musharraf’s ouster would not have been easy if he managed to win USA’s support. In fact, USA was his last refuge, and Musharraf had heavily banked on the country which had considered Musharraf’s Pakistan a significant ally in the war against terrorism. However, Bush and his companions decided to keep themselves away from the internal politics of Pakistan, leaving Musharraf helpless against the huge tide of opposition against him.
Well, now comes the crucial question. Now Musharraf is out, what will happen to the ruling coalition? There have been some sporadic comments that anti-Musharraf movement was the only unifying factor for the coalition partners having lots of differences over various issues. In fact, they had joined hands only to address the common political objective, i.e. the ouster of Musharraf. With that common political objective achieved, will they be now able to retain their friendship?
Their differences of opinion have already been out on various occasions, which raise serious questions about the sustainability of the coalition. One key issue, that is threatening the coalition’s sustainability, is the issue of reinstating the judges suspended by Musharraf. In fact, the difference of opinion on this issue has gone to such an extent that just the other day Nawaz Sharif threatened to pull out of the coalition.
The leaders of the coalition partner must sort out all these issues as soon as possible, and ensure a stable government aimed at offering a clean and effective administration. The failure of the democratically elected government to sustain its internal problems will not only pave the way for the army’s revival (with either Musharraf or Kiyani or somebody else at the helm), but will also seriously damage Pakistan’s common peoples’ faith and confidence on the country’s democratic political parties. After all, how can a coalition claim to solve the country’s problems when it cannot solve its internal problems?
Photo Courtesy: www.apna.tv
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Terrorism Makes India Bleed Again
The “Trust Vote” drama was just over, with the people of India convinced that it was going to be the only hot topic of discussion for some time now. And soon they were proved to be wrong. There arrived another hot topic of discussion, so hot that the Indian people would have been happy if it did not appear.
A bunch of “committed” and “dedicated” terrorists, “determined” to achieve objectives that only they can understand, came up with the “heroic” deed of carrying out blasts in the two cities located in two different parts of India, one being Bangalore in the southern India and the other being Ahmedabad in western India. The natural end result was the loss of several innocent lives, along with lots of injured people going through a traumatic experience in various hospitals and nursing homes.
As usual the government has suddenly become hyper active, with the police forces of different states, intelligence agencies, etc. working overtime to catch the culprits. Our honourable ministers from the Union Home Ministry are visiting the affected areas “to take stock of the situation” (does a person overnight become an expert after becoming a minister?), and then briefing the media about their “carefully structured” course and plan of action. The media has now concentrated its entire focus on this issue, with enthusiastic and hard working correspondents of various TV channels tracking all the relevant developments round-the-clock. The former heads of police, intelligence agencies, self-styled defence experts, etc are appearing in various TV shows to share their “rich experience” in fighting terrorism, with “valuable suggestions” about how the menace can be curbed. There are innumerable articles in various newspapers, offering “in-depth” discussion on the exact nature of the problem, highlighting various socio-economic-political factors behind it and ways to address the latter.
However, we all know that all these will go on only for few days. Very soon everything will be “back to normalcy”, with the unfortunate incidents completely out of people’s mind. We will get back to our callous and indifferent attitude towards terrorism and other disruptive activities, waiting to be shaken up by another repetition of such heinous acts.
A bunch of “committed” and “dedicated” terrorists, “determined” to achieve objectives that only they can understand, came up with the “heroic” deed of carrying out blasts in the two cities located in two different parts of India, one being Bangalore in the southern India and the other being Ahmedabad in western India. The natural end result was the loss of several innocent lives, along with lots of injured people going through a traumatic experience in various hospitals and nursing homes.
As usual the government has suddenly become hyper active, with the police forces of different states, intelligence agencies, etc. working overtime to catch the culprits. Our honourable ministers from the Union Home Ministry are visiting the affected areas “to take stock of the situation” (does a person overnight become an expert after becoming a minister?), and then briefing the media about their “carefully structured” course and plan of action. The media has now concentrated its entire focus on this issue, with enthusiastic and hard working correspondents of various TV channels tracking all the relevant developments round-the-clock. The former heads of police, intelligence agencies, self-styled defence experts, etc are appearing in various TV shows to share their “rich experience” in fighting terrorism, with “valuable suggestions” about how the menace can be curbed. There are innumerable articles in various newspapers, offering “in-depth” discussion on the exact nature of the problem, highlighting various socio-economic-political factors behind it and ways to address the latter.
However, we all know that all these will go on only for few days. Very soon everything will be “back to normalcy”, with the unfortunate incidents completely out of people’s mind. We will get back to our callous and indifferent attitude towards terrorism and other disruptive activities, waiting to be shaken up by another repetition of such heinous acts.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Tit For Tat For West Bengal Minister
On 5th June, 2008 the Left Front had called for a Bandh in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura – the three Indian states where they are in power – as a mark of protest against the Indian national government’s decision to hike the fuel price.
Quite naturally the common people had to face lots of troubles in the Bandh affected states, as they were forced to stay back at home by the “committed” supporters of Left Front. There was widespread hooliganism, like deflating of car tyres, forced stopping of cabs, and so on. A huge number of air and rail passengers got stranded in airports and railway platforms, with the elderly and little children having a really tough time.
However, a hapless minister of the West Bengal government himself got the taste of this hooliganism, when some passengers of the train - in which he himself was travelling – paid him back in the same coin.
The story goes like this –
P-power & party power - Blocked people block minister
Kishanganj/Siliguri, June 5: CPM minister Asok Bhattacharya got a taste of his party’s own medicine today when fellow passengers on a bandh-hit train refused to let him complete his journey by car.
The municipal affairs minister was virtually confined for eight hours on the New Jalpaiguri-bound Darjeeling Mail, stranded at Bihar’s Kishanganj station because of squatting up the line in Bengal.
“How does it feel now? The minister should get to know how the rest of us feel during these meaningless bandhs,” said Dilip Singh, 33, a salesman from Siliguri who was later arrested on the charge of misbehaving with Asok and given bail.
This is the second instance of CPM leaders getting a taste of people power this week. On Monday, a Calcutta crowd had egged a policeman on to book six-time MP Tarit Topdar’s driver after he broke traffic rules and then tried to pull rank.
CPM state secretary Biman Bose dismissed any suggestion of public anger against bandhs, saying: “Asok was stopped in Bihar.” The passengers of the Sealdah-NJP train, which briefly touches Bihar, were mostly from Bengal, though.
Saheli Bhattacharya was Siliguri-bound with her children, aged 8 and 11. “There was no food or water and the minister was about to leave; I and the others requested him to stay,” she said.
Asok, whose act of travelling conflicted with the party’s aim of paralysing the state, appeared to undermine the bandh further by pleading he had “important work” to finish. That infuriated Jalpaiguri-bound Biswajit Ganguly, who said: “He knew his party had called the bandh, yet he told us he had important work. Well, were the rest of us travelling for fun?”
Asok spent the hours reading a book on globalisation in his air-conditioned first-class coach till the journey resumed at 2.45pm. The train had arrived at Kishanganj at 6.45am but within 10 minutes, the station announced a delay because of squatting at Aluabari and Raninagar.
The minister immediately began flexing his political muscle. “I rang up party members… and got them to withdraw the (two) blockades. I informed the Katihar divisional railway manager (DRM) but no effort was made to get the train moving,” Asok said.
Around 10.30, Kishanganj police chief M.R. Nayak arrived with an extra car for the minister, upsetting the passengers. Nayak said he had merely offered to take the minister to the Circuit House, and Asok too later claimed he had no intention of making it to Siliguri by road.
Dilip was “threatening and abusive”, the minister said. “Some passengers led by this youth, who wore a red shirt, said they wouldn’t let me leave. He kept yelling and sneaked into my compartment.”
Even before this, some passengers had begun shouting at Asok, prompting Jalpaiguri police chief Tripurari — a co-passenger — to intervene.
At NJP, Dilip was charged with unlawful assembly, wrongful confinement and misbehaviour as Asok left for home in Siliguri. “I protested like the others,” Dilip said.
Katihar DRM Mehtab Singh said trains stranded up the line had delayed the green light to the Darjeeling Mail.
Source : The Telegraph (Calcutta Edition).
I am certainly not rejoicing the fact that the minister had to face such a bitter experience. What happened was certainly unfortunate. However, I feel that the incident was a boon in disguise, as it enabled the minister to realize the intensity of problems that the common people face due to such mindless political activities (like Bandh). While I feel that the passengers of that train could have launched their protest in a gentler manner, I can fully understand the frustration and grievance which made them come up with such a rare expression of public fury. This incident is a wake up call for all the political parties, who fail to gauge the extent of public dissatisfaction with all the offensive political activities lke Bandh.
By the way, I have a humble question for the West Bengal government. Mr Dilip, the passenger who reportedly instigated other passengers to heckle the minister was arrested by police, though later he was released on bail. Has the government taken any such such step against at least one of those Left Front supporters, who came up with tremendous misbehavior with the common people of West Bengal to ensure that the Bandh was successful?
Quite naturally the common people had to face lots of troubles in the Bandh affected states, as they were forced to stay back at home by the “committed” supporters of Left Front. There was widespread hooliganism, like deflating of car tyres, forced stopping of cabs, and so on. A huge number of air and rail passengers got stranded in airports and railway platforms, with the elderly and little children having a really tough time.
However, a hapless minister of the West Bengal government himself got the taste of this hooliganism, when some passengers of the train - in which he himself was travelling – paid him back in the same coin.
The story goes like this –
P-power & party power - Blocked people block minister
Kishanganj/Siliguri, June 5: CPM minister Asok Bhattacharya got a taste of his party’s own medicine today when fellow passengers on a bandh-hit train refused to let him complete his journey by car.
The municipal affairs minister was virtually confined for eight hours on the New Jalpaiguri-bound Darjeeling Mail, stranded at Bihar’s Kishanganj station because of squatting up the line in Bengal.
“How does it feel now? The minister should get to know how the rest of us feel during these meaningless bandhs,” said Dilip Singh, 33, a salesman from Siliguri who was later arrested on the charge of misbehaving with Asok and given bail.
This is the second instance of CPM leaders getting a taste of people power this week. On Monday, a Calcutta crowd had egged a policeman on to book six-time MP Tarit Topdar’s driver after he broke traffic rules and then tried to pull rank.
CPM state secretary Biman Bose dismissed any suggestion of public anger against bandhs, saying: “Asok was stopped in Bihar.” The passengers of the Sealdah-NJP train, which briefly touches Bihar, were mostly from Bengal, though.
Saheli Bhattacharya was Siliguri-bound with her children, aged 8 and 11. “There was no food or water and the minister was about to leave; I and the others requested him to stay,” she said.
Asok, whose act of travelling conflicted with the party’s aim of paralysing the state, appeared to undermine the bandh further by pleading he had “important work” to finish. That infuriated Jalpaiguri-bound Biswajit Ganguly, who said: “He knew his party had called the bandh, yet he told us he had important work. Well, were the rest of us travelling for fun?”
Asok spent the hours reading a book on globalisation in his air-conditioned first-class coach till the journey resumed at 2.45pm. The train had arrived at Kishanganj at 6.45am but within 10 minutes, the station announced a delay because of squatting at Aluabari and Raninagar.
The minister immediately began flexing his political muscle. “I rang up party members… and got them to withdraw the (two) blockades. I informed the Katihar divisional railway manager (DRM) but no effort was made to get the train moving,” Asok said.
Around 10.30, Kishanganj police chief M.R. Nayak arrived with an extra car for the minister, upsetting the passengers. Nayak said he had merely offered to take the minister to the Circuit House, and Asok too later claimed he had no intention of making it to Siliguri by road.
Dilip was “threatening and abusive”, the minister said. “Some passengers led by this youth, who wore a red shirt, said they wouldn’t let me leave. He kept yelling and sneaked into my compartment.”
Even before this, some passengers had begun shouting at Asok, prompting Jalpaiguri police chief Tripurari — a co-passenger — to intervene.
At NJP, Dilip was charged with unlawful assembly, wrongful confinement and misbehaviour as Asok left for home in Siliguri. “I protested like the others,” Dilip said.
Katihar DRM Mehtab Singh said trains stranded up the line had delayed the green light to the Darjeeling Mail.
Source : The Telegraph (Calcutta Edition).
I am certainly not rejoicing the fact that the minister had to face such a bitter experience. What happened was certainly unfortunate. However, I feel that the incident was a boon in disguise, as it enabled the minister to realize the intensity of problems that the common people face due to such mindless political activities (like Bandh). While I feel that the passengers of that train could have launched their protest in a gentler manner, I can fully understand the frustration and grievance which made them come up with such a rare expression of public fury. This incident is a wake up call for all the political parties, who fail to gauge the extent of public dissatisfaction with all the offensive political activities lke Bandh.
By the way, I have a humble question for the West Bengal government. Mr Dilip, the passenger who reportedly instigated other passengers to heckle the minister was arrested by police, though later he was released on bail. Has the government taken any such such step against at least one of those Left Front supporters, who came up with tremendous misbehavior with the common people of West Bengal to ensure that the Bandh was successful?
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
World Loses Its Only Hindu King
Nepal had already lost the distinction of being the only Hindu state of the world, when the country’s popularly elected parliament proclaimed it to be a secular state (i.e. a state without any official religion) by shedding off the status of a Hindu state (i.e. a state with Hinduism as the official religion). And on 28th May, 2008 it also lost the “remaining distinction” of being the world’s only Hindu kingdom, with a special assembly voting to abolish the 240 years old monarchy.
King Gyanendra, who till the other day was the world’s only Hindu king, has now turned into an ordinary citizen of Nepal. He and his family has been given 15 days of time to vacate the Narayanhiti Royal Palace, the abode of his ancestors for years, which the government plans to convert into a museum.
While it is certainly true that the Nepalese royal family was infamous for its lack of respect for democracy, at the same time nobody can deny this fact that the King (i.e. the Monarchy) had already become too weak to create any hindrance for the smooth flow of democracy in the country. Under such circumstances, it was meaningless to abolish the monarchy completely. Rather, it could have been very much retained – by keeping a strong control on the lavishness of the royal family members – as the Nepalese King was some sort of a national icon, something like the “National Emblem” of the country.
However, the Maoists were determined to completely dethrone the Monarch and abolish the monarchy. It is not that they considered the King to be a threat for the smooth functioning of democracy. Their only interest was to see their leader Prachanda as the first President of the country, a long cherished wish of Prachanda which he has never tried to hide. At last his dream has come true.
It may be nice that Nepal is now free from the clutches of its royals. But is it a better situation to be under the clutches of Communists, who themselves are not known to be very respectful of democratic norms? Only time can answer this.
King Gyanendra, who till the other day was the world’s only Hindu king, has now turned into an ordinary citizen of Nepal. He and his family has been given 15 days of time to vacate the Narayanhiti Royal Palace, the abode of his ancestors for years, which the government plans to convert into a museum.
While it is certainly true that the Nepalese royal family was infamous for its lack of respect for democracy, at the same time nobody can deny this fact that the King (i.e. the Monarchy) had already become too weak to create any hindrance for the smooth flow of democracy in the country. Under such circumstances, it was meaningless to abolish the monarchy completely. Rather, it could have been very much retained – by keeping a strong control on the lavishness of the royal family members – as the Nepalese King was some sort of a national icon, something like the “National Emblem” of the country.
However, the Maoists were determined to completely dethrone the Monarch and abolish the monarchy. It is not that they considered the King to be a threat for the smooth functioning of democracy. Their only interest was to see their leader Prachanda as the first President of the country, a long cherished wish of Prachanda which he has never tried to hide. At last his dream has come true.
It may be nice that Nepal is now free from the clutches of its royals. But is it a better situation to be under the clutches of Communists, who themselves are not known to be very respectful of democratic norms? Only time can answer this.
Photo courtesy: www.abc.net.au
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
